This Forum was created to divert traffic from Current Events at the height of the BALCO scandal. It comes and goes as "needed"; it's back to being locked.

Postby peach » Thu Sep 07, 2006 3:50 am

Simonkelly wrote:I have read a few of these threads and have decided to post my opinion on this one. What I'm mildly amused about is posters coming in with I told you so she's innocent. And her detractors saying nothing.

What can you say ? It would just be yanked the minute you said anything ANYWAY...
Posts: 822
Joined: Thu Feb 23, 2006 2:10 am

Postby kamikaze7 » Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:33 am

Does anyone know why it takes so long to get a B sample ?
Posts: 705
Joined: Sat Jul 01, 2006 3:05 pm

Postby Simonkelly » Thu Sep 07, 2006 4:39 am

True Peach!

I have to say I'm not a Marion Jones hater! I wouldn't be a big fan either because of the fact that she associates herself with known cheats. As in Charlie Francis, Tim Montgomery, CJ Hunter, Trevor Graham - not putting Riddick in that but I'm not sure.
Posts: 6
Joined: Mon Aug 21, 2006 5:18 am
Location: Dublin Ireland

Postby nevetsllim » Thu Sep 07, 2006 8:37 am

RJMB_1 wrote:
nevetsllim wrote:
tafnut wrote:I really . . . REALLY . . . REALLY . . . REALLY . . . want to believe in her innocence, but now I have absolutely no idea WHAT to believe. That 'A' positive broke my spirit, and I can't will it back.

I agree, there is a lot of evidence to say that she has been taking drugs, but now you have this.

I can't say I am too surprised, because why would a sprinter take EPO?

What evidence? she had a 16year old world best of 11.14 by 22 she had 10.76 which is an improvement of 0.38 over 5 years or 0.076 a year - not a helluva lot during those ages even if she was mainly doing basketball.

Like the fact she was strongly linked to BALCO, her ex-shot putting husband (can't recall his name) reporting that he walked into a room and saw her injecting a needle into her stomach. Don't know if this is true or not.
Posts: 6261
Joined: Sat Oct 15, 2005 2:54 am

Leaking of A sample too common

Postby WalkandJog » Thu Sep 07, 2006 9:43 am

Now that Marion's B test has come back negative, something really should be done to stop this leaking of A test results. Even as far back as Mary Slaney's leak of her positive A testosterone result in the late 90's, this type of leak has become all too common and very damaging for athletes.

I recall recently on the emmy awards a few weeks ago, the host Conan O'Brien made some lame and ill-informed joke about someone being more full of testosterone than Marion Jones. So her reputation has been severely damaged by this leak.

Say what you will about Marion and others who are under a cloud of suspicion, but if the drug enforcement agencies continue to operate with such wanton lack of adherence to their own guidelines on public disclosure, then this sort of media circus hurts their own credibility as well.

I mean, haven't ALL the recent initial A positives been leaks? Landis, Gatlin, Jones? Makes it seem like a witch hunt rather than a professional agency trying to fairly and judiciously find the real drug cheats. If the drug testing agencies want to restore credibility to amateur athletics, they need to get their own houses in order and set the tone for professionalism and reliably sound disclosure protocols. Undercuts their own credibility in testing and procedural containment when this sort of reckless leaking becomes the norm. If they genuinely cared about the athletes, then they would make absolutely sure that no A results would be announced before the B sample is tested.

I mean, how difficult can it be to contain this information between the span of two drug tests? If they cannot maintain this sort of simple confidentiality, when the reputation of athletes is at stake, then the drug agencies need a higher agency to police THEM so that they abide by their own rules and are penalized when they leak these results and irreperably damage the reputation of athletes who are ultimately found not guilty of doping. Perhaps a rule should be enacted to where the any positive A result would be discarded if it is leaked before a B sample confirms the doping allegation. That would seem fair to me.
Posts: 135
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby bad hammy » Thu Sep 07, 2006 10:19 am


Couldn't agree more. Same goes for grand jury leaks.

(Agree except for the Gatlin reference - he disclosed after the B test was in.)
bad hammy
Posts: 10880
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby nctrackfan » Fri Sep 08, 2006 3:43 pm

The Marion Haters may get their pound of flesh eventually, but not today. I hope her testimony to a grand jury a while back does not come back to bite her. I have not heard anything about her possibly perjuring herself, so she may be OK there. What is the statute of limitation for perjury? Also, what is the status of the check-counterfeiting scheme to which she has been linked? Was she even indicted?
Last edited by nctrackfan on Sun Sep 10, 2006 7:32 am, edited 1 time in total.
Posts: 193
Joined: Thu Jul 27, 2006 5:37 pm
Location: NC

Postby EPelle » Fri Sep 08, 2006 11:19 pm

Marion Jones Grand Jury testimony is said to be grossly inconsistent with the testimony offered by several others in connection with her - something which Victor Conte revealed to one of the San Francisco Chronicle reporters in an e-mail exchange...testimony he wrote will "come back and bite her in the butt".
Posts: 21442
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby eldrick » Sat Sep 09, 2006 1:51 am

are you specifically saying marion's testimony is inconsistent with that of a convict ?
Posts: 14147
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:31 am
Location: 19th hole st andrews

Postby CookyMonzta » Sat Sep 09, 2006 11:56 pm

eldrick wrote:are you specifically saying marion's testimony is inconsistent with that of a convict ?

Therein lies the problem for USADA. The negative B-sample only makes it worse for them.
Posts: 2392
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby RJMB_1 » Sun Sep 10, 2006 1:43 am

A link only on this messsage but worth reading
Posts: 261
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: POKE 9450,173, Unlimited Kilobytes

Postby Snation » Sun Sep 10, 2006 8:54 am

Read the link above. Very good job by the BBC!
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:03 am
Location: sunny iowa

Postby Snation » Sun Sep 10, 2006 9:07 am

There is a controversy in 'Blood' --a medical journal-- about testing for rhEPO.

The link is here: ... t=Abstract
Reponses include Don Catlin, and the scientists who originated the test.

You cannot view the reports unless you subscribe to Blood, or use a medical library that does. If you could view the article, you would see photos of the electrophoresis of EPO and rhEPO.

It is dense reading. Incredibly technical. And the photos of what these guys are is not like looking at bullet hole in a body. Very subtle.
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:03 am
Location: sunny iowa

Postby 26mi235 » Sun Sep 10, 2006 1:04 pm

Snation, I do not know who you are and I can only guess at your background, but thank you for coming and providing your opinions and knowledge for us to read.
Posts: 16317
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI

Postby Snation » Sun Sep 10, 2006 2:57 pm

Thanks, man.

I am learning alot from posters here, too.

How can I post a jpg image? I might be able to download an image of an rhEPO so people could see how it looks.
Posts: 207
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 11:03 am
Location: sunny iowa

Postby EPelle » Sun Sep 10, 2006 10:20 pm

Copy the html and .jpg properties, and post them as such above between the img tags, but no spaces.

Example: Image
Posts: 21442
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am

Postby 26mi235 » Mon Sep 11, 2006 8:10 am

On the topic of the EPO test there seems to be a rather common misconception, which is in evidence in comments by Deena Kastor. The duration of identifiable rEPO is relatively brief, often given as 48 to 72 hours. This feature is cited as one reason for its utilization.

The commenter makes the mistaken inference that if a sample is kept a little bit longer the rEPO signal will deteriorate. It is the difference between what happens metabolically versus when in cold storage. Note that th eFrench lab test 6-year old urine samples and it was reported that a number of those tested provided an indication of rEPO.
Posts: 16317
Joined: Sat Oct 08, 2005 4:32 am
Location: Madison, WI


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest